Changed one part of the sentence from "shown" to "suspected" because the results were not statistically significant: http://jnci.oxfordjournals.org/content/93/20/1557.full "When bedroom ambient light level was considered as a categorical variable, there was an indication of an increased risk of breast cancer among subjects with the brightest bedrooms, but this result was not statistically significant (OR = 1.4; 95% CI = 0.8 to 2.6)." A CI of 0.8 would indicate a protective effect ... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.114.147.43 ( talk) 02:57, 11 January 2011 (UTC) reply

When this article someday is reorganized, which I think it needs, I'd suggest adding a History section. Some research into the media hysteria about this miracle drug, starting about early-1990s, would be appropriate. A brief timeline telling what was known, when, about melatonin would be interesting. I'm parking a couple of facts and links here.

Newsweek's cover on melatonin, 1995, might be a good illustration.

Melatonin was named by its "discoverer" in 1958; before that it was referred to as "(bovine) pineal gland extracts". Here is a link (PDF) to Dr. Aaron Bunson Lerner's first paper about it where the word melatonin is used. Dr. Lerner was then the (first) director of Yale's Department of Dermatology. Here is Lerner's NYT obit from February 2007; he died at age 86. ( UPI's obit contains an error, as Lerner's work was on the pigmentation of frog skin, not human skin.)

A very decent student project on melatonin, including a page of references, is here.

-- Hordaland ( talk) 00:14, 23 March 2008 (UTC) reply

I changed this line: "No studies have as yet been conducted to determine whether there are any long-term side effects. There are, however, case reports about patients who have taken the supplement for years.".[65]

To: "Case report are available on patients who have taken the supplement for years.".[65]

Can a study really be made to determine side effects? Side-effects are surely found in studies! I noticed it because I followed the link thinking it was an example of a side-effect - which was because of the way the lines were phrased. I decided to remove the first line - looking at it again, pehaps the word "to" should have read "that". -- Matt Lewis ( talk) 16:45, 18 April 2008 (UTC) reply

I can see how you read it as you did. I changed things around a bit, and hope it makes sense now. -- Hordaland ( talk) 17:31, 18 April 2008 (UTC) reply

There seems to be some biased editing. Misrepresenting studies that showed no effect of melatonin were quoted as supporting and verifying melatonin. I believe this is an area that Naturapaths and Homeopaths may vandalise to support their products.-- 114.76.7.223 ( talk) 11:14, 4 March 2010 (UTC) reply

"As of 2006 melatonin is known to affect the timing of endogenous melatonin production during long-term treatment in rats."

cite journal | author = Sankaran M, Subramanian P | title = Modulation of biochemical circadian rhythms during long-term melatonin treatment in rats. | journal = Singapore Med J | year = 2006 | id = PMID  16397720

Quote from the abstract: Exogenous melatonin administered caused delays in the acrophase of glucose, total protein and melatonin rhythms, whereas advances in the acrophases of reduced glutathione were observed.

This is basic research in rats on several factors, cited here only to show effects on "the timing of endogenous melatonin production" in rats. It is already well documented that exogenous administration of melatonin affects the timing of endogenous melatonin production in humans in a phase-dependent manner (see PRC), so this is not news and is of no interest here. (Especially in a section entitled Medical indications!) -- Hordaland ( talk) 03:19, 19 April 2008 (UTC) reply

According to the Therapeutic Drugs Administration (Australian regulators of drugs), Melatonin is a Schedule 4 drug, ie PRESCRIPTION ONLY.

Anecdotally (and of course this isn't case-control, placebo control data), we have found it EXTREMELY effective for our autistic child, with a complete abrogation of night terrors, no hangover effect, and no apparent changes in other behaviours, other than child and rest of family being much less tired. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 210.11.192.124 ( talk) 00:02, 22 April 2008 (UTC) reply

The Australian Prescriber journal (dated 1997), published by the Australian TGA, explains why this "fad" drug, melatonin, is not available for sale in Australia without prescription.

—DIV ( 109.204.95.19 ( talk) 14:16, 10 July 2011 (UTC)) reply

I've found at least two internet-based suppliers who sell this without requiring a prescription. IMHO, it looks like this is being treated as a "diet supplement" rather than a "therapeutic drug", ie rather like a vitamin. Old_Wombat ( talk) 10:33, 25 November 2011 (UTC) reply

Melatonin is mentioned extensively in Hunter S. Thompson's novel "Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas", and is used recreationally by the two main characters.

I believe what the original statement is referring to is Mescaline. In the novel there is an extensive use of Mescaline, and Melatonin itself is not covered on any base in the book. If anyone does perchance find truth they may place the statement back where it belongs as it has been removed.

( AnthonyMBeck ( talk) 18:06, 4 May 2008 (UTC)) reply

The WikiProject with this name is listed at the top of this page. Can someone from the project explain why melatonin is included? Is it thought to be a psychedelic, a dissociative or a deliriant? (I've read the long article Psychedelics, dissociatives and deliriants which doesn't mention melatonin.) Thanks. -- Hordaland ( talk) 04:58, 24 June 2008 (UTC) reply

Thanks to user Twas Now for removing that WikiProject from this page, with the comment "not a psychoactive". -- Hordaland ( talk) 12:09, 29 June 2008 (UTC) reply

My doctor recently recommended trying melatonin for the sleep deprivation caused by solumedrol. He commented that in some of his other patients, he's seen it also apparently help with the high blood sugar effects of such steroids. -- 206.3.42.247 ( talk) 13:24, 11 October 2008 (UTC) reply

The review article is Terry PD, Villinger F, Bubenik GA, Sitaraman SV. "Melatonin and ulcerative colitis: Evidence, biological mechanisms, and future research." Inflamm Bowel Dis. 2008 Jul 14. [Epub ahead of print] PMID: 18626968

There have been three decent studies showing that melatonin improves IBS; only case studies have been reported for UC. Nevertheless, there is evidence that melatonin levels and UC incidence and severity are linked. My own analysis is that melatonin as a short-term adjunct treatment in UC, IBS, and presumably Crohn's looks promising. Anybody want to add this? Richard Knight ( talk) 03:18, 23 October 2008 (UTC) reply

If taken several hours before bedtime according to the phase response curve (PRC) for melatonin, it merely advances the phase of melatonin production. If taken 30 to 90 minutes before bedtime, it advances the period of melatonin's presence in the blood. 91.132.224.196 ( talk) 09:08, 11 February 2009 (UTC) reply

Well, yeah, it's true. Definitely could be phrased/explained better. In the opposite order related to the above:

1. Timed right and taken an hour or so before bedtime, melatonin is put into the blood earlier than the brain's own production and acts as a mild hypnotic. That's the easier-to-understand portion of the above, and it works for many people with or without a circadian rhythm disorder.
2. The human PRC for melatonin is, I think, more difficult to understand. It's been shown that a very small dose earlier in the evening/afternoon does not make one sleepy but does advance the phase slightly and is additive to the effect of using light therapy upon awakening. Light therapy may advance the phase about one to two-and-a-half hours and a small oral dose melatonin, timed correctly some hours before bedtime, can add about 30 minutes to the advance achieved with light therapy.

The text you cite is from the section Safety of supplementation (with a {citation needed} tag at the end of the paragraph), while the explanation of the function(s) is/should be in the section Current and potential medical indications: Treatment of circadian rhythm disorders. Both need some reworking, which I'll get at and I'll find the missing citation (to Phyllis Zee et al, if I remember correctly). - Hordaland ( talk) 10:54, 11 February 2009 (UTC) reply

The following text (bullet point below) with its 2 refs, claimed to be by the same author, was recently removed by an IP. I saw that with relief, as it has bothered me; it seemed remote to the topic and Wikipedia doesn't predict the future. Now I've read the entire first ref , which doesn't mention melatonin. I've read the abstract of what might be the second ref ('right' PMID, 'wrong' authors' names); melatonin isn't named here, either, and the content seems quite removed from the sentence it supposedly supported. It's about DMT, and our DMT-article mentions melatonin only once: "Growth hormone blood levels rose equally in response to all doses of DMT, and melatonin levels were unaffected."

Essentially the same text seems to have been added the first time 12 March 2007 by user:Pierre-Alain Gouanvic. As mentioned it was just removed by an IP, then restored by BorgQueen, then removed by myself. (I'll notify BorgQueen of the mention here.)

• It has been suggested that psychotropic drugs be readmitted in the field of scientific inquiry and therapy. ^[1] If so, melatonin may be prioritized for research in this reemerging field of psychiatry. ^[2]

- Hordaland ( talk) 17:19, 30 May 2009 (UTC) reply

I would dispute the statement that is in "Safety of supplementation" after the citation #75... 'In addition, the industry is now required to report to the FDA "all serious dietary supplement related adverse events."' The FDA has ALWAYS required supplement companies to report serious adverse effects... they are just cracking down on it more with the new cGMP guidelines. It also doesn't help that this isn't cited. The FDA website (at http://google2.fda.gov/search?q=serious+adverse+effects+supplements&x=0&y=0&client=FDAgov&site=FDAgov&lr=&proxystylesheet=FDAgov&output=xml_no_dtd&getfields=* ) has over 3000 hits about serious adverse effects that have been reported with various supplements over time and they date back many years before the cGMP guidelines were established, but it would take hours of searching to give citation saying how long they have required the reporting. If the alteration I'm making on it isn't good enough, then please delete the statement as it wasn't cited. Burleigh2 ( talk) 15:35, 20 August 2009 (UTC) reply

Instead of starting an edit war, I will post this here. Recently, a "Citation required" tab was put on a clip at the start of the 'Safety of Supplementation' section. It's basically common knowledge that it is available OTC in many countries ('common knowledge' being that you can walk into most drug stores and find it on the shelf) where other countries require a prescription (you have it behind the counter in those countries), but I found a website that specified this and posted the link, but it was removed with a note that the original should be referred. The problem is, the original source (which is listed in the PDF at http://adc.bmj.com/cgi/content/full/90/11/1206 ) is a website that you have to have a subscription for to view and look up the articles. Does that make it any less valid of information? I found it on Yahoo and there is an option for viewing the page as an HTML at http://74.6.146.127/search/cache?ei=UTF-8&p=where+is+melatonin+prescribed%3F&y=Search&fr=yfp-t-153&u=www.pennspecials.co.uk/1184.file.dld&w=where+melatonin+prescribed+prescribe+prescribing&d=KpbrRBlMTIoX&icp=1&.intl=us but I'm not sure if that would suffice for this user. Any objections to using this link instead? Burleigh2 ( talk) 21:37, 25 August 2009 (UTC) reply

I'm having trouble following. Your first link goes to the full text of a "Letter", printed in a pediatric journal. It tells of results from a questionnaire on use of melatonin in UK only, where melatonin is not available OTC. The PDF includes that letter and many others. Doesn't, as far as I can see, say anything about the availability of melatonin in other countries.

The html version looks, by skimming, identical to the PDF.

In the "Safety of supplementation" section, there is only one [citation needed] tag, and that is where it is claimed that in some EU member states, melatonin is available OTC. I cannot see that your link(s) have anything to do with that question. Frankly, I have my doubts that you can get melatonin OTC anywhere in Europe, but I don't know that.

If there is an article or "Letter" answering the question within the cited material, what is its title? - Hordaland ( talk) 02:32, 26 August 2009 (UTC) reply

Yes, the website is identical to the PDF. I found it through a Yahoo search as one of the only sources (aside from sales websites, which would likely be taken down for spam) that said it was available OTC in the U.S. and only by prescription in other places. The specific line in the PDF was 'Melatonin is currently an unlicensed, "named patient only" medicine in the UK, although it is available as a dietary supplement in the United States' which does point that out. Yes, it's not the most ideal as saying straight out it's available OTC in the U.S. and by prescription in other places, but anyone can find that out by going to their local drugstore. Burleigh2 ( talk) 17:48, 27 August 2009 (UTC) reply

It says, presently: "Melatonin is available without prescription in most cases in the United States, Canada and some member states of the European Union[citation needed], while ..."

A citation is needed for the claim that melatonin is available without prescription in some member states of the European Union. I will remove that portion of the sentence, as it is both unlikely and uncited. - Hordaland ( talk) 06:36, 28 August 2009 (UTC) reply

I'm not sure why there isn't a mention on this, but why doesn't it specify in the article that Melatonin shouldn't be given to children unless specified by their doctor? There's a warning right on most bottles and at http://www.drugs.com/mtm/melatonin.html that says not to give it to children. I've come across this issue several times of people giving it to a child and my brain just screams out because of that. Can anyone shed some light on this or find an appropriate place in the article for such a warning? Burleigh2 ( talk) 21:19, 23 October 2009 (UTC) reply

My guess is that this is primarily a CYA activity since so little formal research has been done on dietary supplements. One study showed no teratogenicity in rats has been done and is already cited here. One study on melatonin in children didn't note any side effects, but at n=20 it's pretty small, and another study didn't find any chronic toxicity in children that used it per medical instruction. If nothing else, the "do not use in children without medical advice" might just be to ward off lazy parenting, especially since sleep problems might be an indication of an underlying medical condition. I saw this and this but don't have access to them. SDY ( talk) 21:57, 23 October 2009 (UTC) reply

Agreeing with SDY. In most countries, the hormone is a prescription drug if it is available at all. Thus it is required to be specified by a doctor for patients of all ages. Melatonin is prescribed for children with developmental disorders, ADHD and circadian rhythm disorders. One review by a US government agency found that melatonin is appreciably more effective in reducing sleep onset latency in people younger than 18 than in adults, though the averages don't amount to so very many minutes. They also found that melatonin has little or no effect in people without "circadian abnormalities", as they put it. I'm quite sure I've read that normal children produce higher levels of melatonin than do adults. So I think the warnings are extra careful. - Hordaland ( talk) 00:31, 24 October 2009 (UTC) reply

I agree to a point, but sleeping pills don't have the same warnings on them. If it was just "lazy parenting", then it would be on all sleeping pills. I also agree that they are being extra careful, but I think it's still important to point out warnings that are on the bottles in an informational article, just as you would list common dosages or proper names. Maybe that's just my opinion, but the bottle doesn't just say it for the heck of it. Burleigh2 ( talk) 21:08, 28 October 2009 (UTC) reply

There's also the x factor of not having the robust research that goes into a lot of other sleep medications and maybe also the spin of "it's natural we can give boatloads to the kids and they'll be fine." Drink up, Socrates! I'm trying to think what other sleep aids are available OTC in the US. Interestingly, the mayo clinic specifically gives that "under 20" contraindication as well, and I'm not sure why. SDY ( talk) 22:11, 28 October 2009 (UTC) reply

If I may be reasonably cynical here, nobody gets rich selling pure melatonin, OTC or not. There's been lots of research on its effect on circadian rhythms, mostly very short term on the usual volunteers (college age men). No long term research ("over 3 months") on people of any age. Though there are many people who have used it daily for years.

The drug companies do make money on medications that target melatonin receptors, such as Rozerem and Circadin. Anybody know if there are such warnings on them? If trials on kids have not been done, there will be those warnings. - Hordaland ( talk) 22:33, 28 October 2009 (UTC) reply

The dietary supplement industry in the US makes no shortage of money and they have a lot of lobbying clout so it's not simply an issue of economics or politics. Back on topic, Rozerem does not appear to have any pediatric approval, so any use in kids would be off label. There is some long-term research on melatonin for use in ADHD-related insomnia (see linked studies above) which didn't find any chronic toxicity, but it wasn't a very large trial. As for Circadin, Circadin is not recommended for use in children and adolescents below age 18 due to insufficient data on safety and efficacy. Since Circadin is melatonin with a couple chemistry tricks, I'm guessing that this is exactly the same reason melatonin is not suggested for pediatrics. SDY ( talk) 02:45, 29 October 2009 (UTC) reply

Re Circadin: it is, in fact, approved in the EU (only) for adults over age 55! I dunno why. And as you point out, it is melatonin. 2 mg timed release, which doesn't allow for experimenting with dosage. (I'll stick with my 1/2 mg melatonin, liquid formula, brand name Natrol, thankyouverymuch.)

If I had a child with ADHD, I'd try melatonin. If I had a child with a circadian rhythm disorder, I'd definitely use melatonin.

Here (on page 3) is the (popularized) story of a 13-year-old treated with melatonin at Johns Hopkins Children's Center. - Hordaland ( talk) 14:19, 29 October 2009 (UTC) reply

Approvals are based on the data submitted and the indications desired, so the reality is that non-approval could mean many things. My guess is that the manufacturer didn't bother applying to have it approved in other populations, and pediatric approvals are sometimes avoided because experimenting on children is ethically complicated. Circadin may also be specifically targeted towards geriatric patients, who tend to respond differently to some medications and the timed release formulation is probably more about staying asleep than getting to sleep in the first place. At any rate, the sources that have been bandied about seem to indicate that leaving a specific warning about use in children out of the article is somewhat defensive, but enough things mention a warning against use in children without medical advice that including it wouldn't be a bad idea. I'm wondering if there is some condition or disease that also produces insomnia in children and would be missed if parents jumped immediately to home treatment without consultation, but I'm no doctor, much less a pediatrician. SDY ( talk) 23:53, 29 October 2009 (UTC) reply

I've found a European study of long-term safety and effects in children, and have added a "Pediatrics" section. - Hordaland ( talk) 23:25, 30 October 2009 (UTC) reply

PDF: Melatonin in paedatric sleep disorders Six pages + references. London New Drugs Group, January 2008. Found through a search at: NHS Evidence. "Systematic reviews and meta-analyses" etc. - Hordaland ( talk) 09:23, 5 November 2009 (UTC) reply

In the Netherlands I and some of my students have used melatonin from a particular brand. This caused very strange dreams. With melatonin in other brands in the same dosage we did not have such dreams. We link this to impurities. We have heard rumors, that this particular brand used melatonin from animal pineals obtained from China. I was not able to substantiate this. When melatonin causes nightmares, one could change the brand and find out if this makes a difference. (Moving personal comments of 14 November by Andreas333 to Talk from article.)

That's a good point, the changing of brands. Mel from animal pineals isn't much used anymore for fear of mad cow or similar; the synthesized is said to be exactly the same. Wondering if you and your students all have DSPS, or if you're just voluntary guinea pigs? More research is needed on people who actually have DSPS and Non-24. What little I've seen, suggests that results from normal subjects cannot necessarily be applied to those of us who have circadian rhythm disorders (CRDs). - Hordaland ( talk) 11:13, 14 November 2009 (UTC) reply

Someone is insisting on using a 1995 reference which states: "Melatonin is not licensed for sale in pharmacies in the UK at the present time but can be bought over the counter in health food shops. Recent newspaper reports suggest that the Medicines Control Agency has written to the suppliers of the synthetic hormone to tell them that in future it will only be available on prescription." (My emphasis.)

That 15-year-old ref isn't good enough to say anything about the availability of melatonin, prescription or OTC, in the UK in 2010.

Our article now states: "Melatonin is available without prescription in most cases in the United States and Canada, while it is available only by prescription or not at all in some other countries." That's all we have any basis for saying, until new sources are found. - Hordaland ( talk) 10:26, 2 February 2010 (UTC) reply

I live in the UK and I buy melatonin from a UK supplier. It IS available in the UK, and this ref IS good enough. Vexorg ( talk) 04:38, 12 February 2010 (UTC) reply

in fact if you'd care to use google you can see there are monay sources in the UK ... http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&safe=off&client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla%3Aen-GB%3Aofficial&gl=uk&num=100&newwindow=1&q=melatonin+uk&btnG=Search&meta=&aq=2&oq=melatonin Vexorg ( talk) 04:42, 12 February 2010 (UTC) reply

That 15 year old ref which states that melatonin then was available in "health food shops" but that the Medicines Control Agency has written ... that in future it will only be available on prescription is in no way a sufficient reference about the situation in 2010. The ref clearly states that the situation in 1995 will likely change. Your shopping experiences are Original Research. What does the Medicines Control Agency say today? Reverting, and restoring the rest of the paragraph, which has gone missing. Hordaland ( talk) 14:55, 12 February 2010 (UTC) reply

The current situation in the UK is that there is only one licensed melatonin product: Circadin, which is made by Lundbeck Ltd. It is only licensed for short-term use in over 55s and is a controlled-release tablet. According to the BNF 58, it is a 2mg tablet, a prescription-only medicine, and costs £10.77 for 21. However, melatonin is often prescribed for treating "sleep disorders in children and adolescents with visual problems, learning difficulties, cerebral palsy and autistic spectrum disorders." [1]. The MHRA recommend the use of the licensed product even for use outside of its licence. Where the controlled release tablet is not suitable, there is one other EU licensed product: Bio-Melatonin, which is available from PharmaNord as a 3mg tablet at £12.97 for 60. Unlike Circadin, those tablets can be crushed for those with swallowing difficulties. The importation of food supplements (which aren't manufactured to medical-product qualities) is not recommended. At least one online UK pharamacy has been told to top selling unlicensed melatonin products. [2]. Unlicensed melatonin is the #1 drug import that the MHRA is notified about. [3] -- Colin° ^Talk 16:19, 12 February 2010 (UTC) reply

While melatonin is not a licensed medicine, it IS available on the UK. I have sourced several suppliers inthe cuirrent ref, which is not original research but links to proof of availabilty. I would question the motives of a Norwegian editor who is clearly obsessed with removing the info from the article that says Melatonin is available in the UK. What the medicines control agency ways is irrelevant. It's not an official medicine. As an entity it is available. Vexorg ( talk) 18:35, 12 February 2010 (UTC) reply

Colin joins the edit war by saying "Please stop edit warring. The product is not legally available in the UK without prescription." - but it IS available. Vexorg ( talk) 18:40, 12 February 2010 (UTC) reply

I don't edit war. I have made my single edit on this issue. If you restore your claim that it is "available in the UK" without establishing consensus on this page, I shall request administrator action. This may result in page protection or a block. Colin° ^Talk 18:50, 12 February 2010 (UTC) reply

Oh please, telling tales isn't helping resolve the issue . I'm just trying to get the article accurate ..... see below ... Vexorg ( talk) 19:16, 12 February 2010 (UTC) reply

I don't believe you will find a UK based retailer so it isn't really available "in the UK". What you choose to import (illegally) from abroad via the internet is another matter. That an online pharmacy has a ".co.uk" address doesn't mean they aren't based in the UK or their operations are conducted in the UK. I dare say you can import illegal rhino horn over the internet, that doesn't make it "available in the UK". BTW, it is classed as a medicine in the UK. What the MHRA says is not irrelevant as they control the law in this regard. I'm quite sure that once (if ever) it really is "available in the UK" then you'll be able to buy it from Boots. Colin° ^Talk 18:50, 12 February 2010 (UTC) reply

... I'm not disputing the law in regards to its legality or whether or not is it licensed I'm just adhering to the truth. And the truth is, it IS available in the UK. Vexorg ( talk) 19:16, 12 February 2010 (UTC) reply

Your definition of "available in" differs from the rest of us then. Colin° ^Talk 19:22, 12 February 2010 (UTC) reply

Well my definition equates to the truth. I live in the UK and I've been buying Melatonin without leaving the UK for years. Vexorg ( talk) 19:31, 12 February 2010 (UTC) reply

If it isn't available legally, it isn't available. -- Gwern (contribs) 01:29 14 February 2010 (GMT)

Of course it's legal. All of you people are guilty of not doing your research ;) The confusioned arises from the fact in the UK, Melatonin is not available in pharmacies due to a mid-90s restriction that's not been repealed. However it IS available in health food shops such as Holland and Barrett etc. http://priory.com/mel.htm 81.97.127.199 ( talk) 08:13, 10 March 2011 (UTC) reply

That link is to a 16-year-old article. According to the UK Indepdendent newspaper melatonin was removed from health-food shops in 1995 as it is now a prescription-only-medicine. See above for the very few cases where it is prescribed in the UK. Colin° ^Talk 08:47, 10 March 2011 (UTC) reply

Unlike numerous articles on the subject, this article was leaning very strongly (suspiciously) towards only selling the over the counter drug. The article suggested that there is nothing you can eat that will significantly increase melatonin levels. (This has been debated and the article should have revealed this). Nor did it explicitly suggest anything else people can do (other than swallow medication) to affect levels such as sunlight upon waking or explicitly stating that simply darkening a room may do the trick. Not that there was not some great information here; it is just that it all led to "the fact" that the only thing we can rationally do is "buy now!" —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.233.128.12 ( talk) 10:49, 3 July 2010 (UTC) reply

That's an interesting objection, 71.233.128.12. Are you planning to add sources to improve balance? For example, it's not enough to point out that there is debate about whether one can get significant melatonin from foodstuffs; a source (reference) is needed.

I agree that the article could use some work. Among else, I feel that the lead is too detailed. If I get 'round to working on it, I'll keep your objection in mind. But, as suggested, you may work on the article, too. - Hordaland ( talk) 12:49, 3 July 2010 (UTC) reply

/// on a different spin of an "unbalanced drug ad" is there any critical mass of people who find the PHOTOGRAPH in the page (on this date) a bit too promotional? The Natures Best and Walgreens brands are prominent, as well as the price, all sitting atop a British Telecom mousepad. Perhaps I am being oversensitive, and have no intention to take any action / but thought I would raise the point since for me PERSONALLY the current photo raised my hackles a little - though it smacks of a well intentioned visual reference from real-life posted by someone trying to simply show a bottle of this purportedly magic potion... GrinchPeru ( talk) 02:41, 16 January 2011 (UTC) reply

Humans could not have had only six hours of light in sub-saharan Africa in winter, considering that here in Ireland we have at least 8 or 9 hours of light for the majority of winter. I'm pretty sure it would in fact be 10+ hours all year around.

Do you really believe humans are designed to live in blackness for 16 hours a day at times? I'm removing it. Anonywiki ( talk) 17:09, 4 July 2010 (UTC) reply

Oops, I answered on your talk page before I saw that you'd written here. On the equator there's 12 hr dark and 12 hr daylight all year = the norm for early humans. Further north and south, there's less daylight in winter. Daylight gives blue light, which suppresses melatonin. Fire, including oil lamps and candles, give yellow/orange/red light, which doesn't. Electric light is much like daylight, and most of us now are exposed to blue and white light for more than 12 hr/day.

I've changed it back but cut out the number 6 and explained a bit better. - Hordaland ( talk) 18:08, 4 July 2010 (UTC) reply

does melatonin supplements increase or decrease a person's deep sleep? 206.248.129.154 ( talk) 03:41, 21 July 2010 (UTC) reply

The talk page of an article is for discussing the article and its development, not the subject of the article. -- Hordaland ( talk) 08:28, 21 July 2010 (UTC) reply

• Given that melatonin is synthesized differently in the variance of light-to-darkness, this finding may only be helpful to those exposed to little to no light at all. Ideal dosing could be somewhat dependent on how much light one is exposed to (among many other unique attributes; age, weight, diet, activities, etc.), and therefore different on a case-by-case basis. It is safe to say that our understanding of how to organize supplementation dosage recommendations remains inconclusive.

This bit of text, removed from the article, is OR. -- Hordaland ( talk) 08:03, 20 September 2010 (UTC) reply

Reading the discussions, I am not the first to notice and am in no way appeased by statements such as, "I admit the article needs some work."

Long before I reached this subheading I was fairly certain I was reading an advertisement for snake oil. A bit of clarification would be helpful here. For instance: Are the properties which limit damage to the human body from radiation related to the properties by which Melatonin reduces the effect of voodoo curses? This is important to the few who may have been born not only with a functioning brain but also armed with skepticism and not afraid to use it.

Not worried about Fukushima? Then try it as a recreational drug like Marijuana, or maybe even LSD! No? Then how about using it to kick that cocaine habit! Sex life got you down? Melatonin is the drug supplement for you! Also good for fire ant infestation, global warming and acne!

I'm a fraction of a tick away from lobbying for deletion.

-- cregil (talk) 03:23, 5 May 2011 (UTC) reply

It may be snake oil as it stands, but there could be something to it. Melatonin is an antioxidant, as the article covers (I think); and absence of melatonin (as in shift work disorder) is linked to cancers... -- Gwern (contribs) 16:12 5 May 2011 (GMT)

Something that is pretty much as bad as a snake oil salesman is someone who claims something is snake oil based on preconceptions rather than the scientific evidence. It is clear from the scientific evidence that melatonin has significant antioxidant properties, and various physiological effects as a result, including (obviously?) reducing the effect of various toxins (some of which are carcinogenic) and radiation. But presumably the fact that this statement includes the words "antioxidant" and suggests medically significant benefits makes it automatically "snake-oil" to someone who then has the arrogance to suggest there should be no article on melatonin in wikipedia (perhaps he believes the chemical should be deleted from metabolic pathways as well? :) ) 82.1.148.7 ( talk) 13:42, 5 July 2011 (UTC) reply

Please see WP:MEDRS, WP:VERIFY, WP:NOR, and WP:UNDUE. When you can provide convincing citations that support your POV, go for it, add it. Otherwise, nothing. OrangeMarlin ^{Talk• Contributions} 21:50, 5 July 2011 (UTC) reply

Not yet mentioned here is the use to control REM Sleep Behavior Disorder (RSD). Student7 ( talk) 01:27, 23 May 2011 (UTC) reply

[redacted]

• Please see wp:TPG, wp:MYSPACE, and wp:NOR LeadSongDog come howl! 20:18, 1 March 2012 (UTC) reply

The Nayak et al. melanopsin reference was published in January 2007, not 2006 as shown in the citation. This is incredibly minor, but just thought you'd like to know. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.88.0.227 ( talk) 20:34, 14 March 2012 (UTC) reply

Fixed. Gnome de plume ( talk) 20:45, 14 March 2012 (UTC) reply

I have today made some improvements. Sections are moved around. Some redundancies are deleted. The article has two sections: "Medical uses" and "Use as medication" which now follow together. Much improvement is still needed on these two sections, combining them. I haven't looked for better sources (yet). -- Hordaland ( talk) 02:50, 15 March 2012 (UTC) reply

The 2 medical-use sections are now combined. That section still needs weeding for redundancies and doubtful claims. -- Hordaland ( talk) 11:29, 15 March 2012 (UTC) reply

An IP left a comment in the article, about melatonin in plants. I reverted it and am pasting it here:

This should be checked, which foods were checked? Montemorecy cherry juice has been found to elevate melotonin in the body and produce longer sleep see Howatson, G., Bell, P.G., Tallent, J., Middleton, B., McHugh, M.P., Ellis, J. (In press – DOI: 10.1007/s00394-011-0263-7). Effect of tart cherry juice (Prunus cerasus) on melatonin levels and enhanced sleep quality. European Journal of Nutrition.

• -- Hordaland ( talk) 09:03, 9 July 2012 (UTC) reply